LensBeginner

LensBeginner

Lives in Italy Italy
Joined on Jan 23, 2012

Comments

Total: 1017, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Uh... 4K should be around 8 MP, more or less due to the fact that various standards exist.

If there is a dedicated camera for video, and it records 4K, why making it 16 MP?

Binning with non-square pixels? alternate line reading? ..?

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 21:33 UTC as 10th comment | 8 replies
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nivedita: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4280839/61117162

Wasn't LoLing about that.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 17:07 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nivedita: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4280839/61117162

It was correct the first time as well... I was LoLing at them, not at you :)

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 13:55 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nivedita: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4280839/61117162

...LoL...

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 13:29 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)

"Camera is quite heavy and bulky"

Heavy, could be.
Bulky... you can't possibly say this with a straight face...
https://camerasize.com/compare/#773,557
https://camerasize.com/compare/#773,655

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 10:36 UTC as 176th comment | 5 replies
On article Sample gallery: Pentax K-1 II (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richmondthefish: Can't wait for the camerastoretv guys to review this. One of the few that does a Pentax review unlike a Jared Polin guy who just cracks jokes "Ah bro do people actually shoot Pentax still???"

Jader who?

Link | Posted on May 3, 2018 at 13:07 UTC
On article Sample gallery: Pentax K-1 II (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: Greens are over saturated and look rather unnatural.

They look quite natural to me.
Have you calibrated your monitor?

Link | Posted on May 3, 2018 at 11:43 UTC
In reply to:

yanisha: darktable 2.4.3 was released several days ago.

https://www.darktable.org/2018/04/darktable-243-released/

Still not posted in news feed. New Gimp and Lightroom on news feed though.

In all fairness, DarkTable made frontpage when 2.4.0 was released.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/2776812471/free-lightroom-alternative-darktable-is-now-available-on-windows

It was big because it was the first Windows port.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 21:38 UTC
In reply to:

User0141875632: I think the optimal configuration for the triple cameras would be:
14mm wide angle
35mm normal focal length
85mm telephoto

Agree with Tom.

24, 40-50, 85-100 could be nice and well-spaced.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2018 at 12:05 UTC
On article Taking your drone to a wedding? Read this first (95 comments in total)

Flubber's Weebo/Weebette come to mind as pioneers in the genre...

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 09:01 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Doing it since ages with my smartphone in low-light conditions.

The advantages compared to a DSLR/mirrorless are:
1. my smartphone has a lightning-fast burst speed, and can take 20 pics in a matter of a couple of seconds, maybe less.
2. no wear on the shutter, since there is none.

If you use PS, you can use load images in series or what's it called, and auto-align them and convert to a smart object just by checking two checkboxes.
Then it's just selecting average as the smart-object fusion method and you're done, hardly need an action to do it.

Bonus tip: since smartphones have limited DR, it's generally better to underexpose (you're gonna be using it in low-light conditions anyway, so it will also minimize motion blur or use a lower ISO): you can then push the shadows with some impunity (16 exposures will reduce noise by a factor of 4, 20 a little better than that).

Takes a little bit of RAM to do, though.

@W5JCK

Yeah that's what I wrote... sqrt(20) = 4.47...

I have installed and tried some other stacking software, like Registax, but they usually have a pretty severe limitation on the size of the input images, don't know about DeepSkyStacker. I need at least 16 MP as input/output.

I agree that PS is massively inefficient for this kind of tasks.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 06:33 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Doing it since ages with my smartphone in low-light conditions.

The advantages compared to a DSLR/mirrorless are:
1. my smartphone has a lightning-fast burst speed, and can take 20 pics in a matter of a couple of seconds, maybe less.
2. no wear on the shutter, since there is none.

If you use PS, you can use load images in series or what's it called, and auto-align them and convert to a smart object just by checking two checkboxes.
Then it's just selecting average as the smart-object fusion method and you're done, hardly need an action to do it.

Bonus tip: since smartphones have limited DR, it's generally better to underexpose (you're gonna be using it in low-light conditions anyway, so it will also minimize motion blur or use a lower ISO): you can then push the shadows with some impunity (16 exposures will reduce noise by a factor of 4, 20 a little better than that).

Takes a little bit of RAM to do, though.

Looks like a nice thing, and well implemented, the way you describe it :)

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2018 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Doing it since ages with my smartphone in low-light conditions.

The advantages compared to a DSLR/mirrorless are:
1. my smartphone has a lightning-fast burst speed, and can take 20 pics in a matter of a couple of seconds, maybe less.
2. no wear on the shutter, since there is none.

If you use PS, you can use load images in series or what's it called, and auto-align them and convert to a smart object just by checking two checkboxes.
Then it's just selecting average as the smart-object fusion method and you're done, hardly need an action to do it.

Bonus tip: since smartphones have limited DR, it's generally better to underexpose (you're gonna be using it in low-light conditions anyway, so it will also minimize motion blur or use a lower ISO): you can then push the shadows with some impunity (16 exposures will reduce noise by a factor of 4, 20 a little better than that).

Takes a little bit of RAM to do, though.

But

1. you have no control on which images to use (I often discard the occasional 1-2 blurred pictures from the burst)

2. you get a processed image, instead of obtaining the clearer picture you can possibly get and have a little flexibility in post, a bit like the age-old jpeg vs RAW debate

3. a Pixel costs, what, 700-900€? I paid less than 200 for my mid-low range Xiaomi two years ago, and it has a 16MP camera module which is ok.

4. don't know what the processing time is on the Pixel, but with PS you get to do it at your leisure at home, and can use the phone immediately after the burst, without waiting times. When I'm out and about I usually have less time & patience than when I'm at home, and I'd rather visit/see things than wait for technology to do its job.

5. The average of 20 vs 12 pictures is a little more than one whole stop better in terms of ISO performance (1/4.47 vs 1/3.46).

To me, there's no contest. Technology will catch up, eventually.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2018 at 13:44 UTC

Doing it since ages with my smartphone in low-light conditions.

The advantages compared to a DSLR/mirrorless are:
1. my smartphone has a lightning-fast burst speed, and can take 20 pics in a matter of a couple of seconds, maybe less.
2. no wear on the shutter, since there is none.

If you use PS, you can use load images in series or what's it called, and auto-align them and convert to a smart object just by checking two checkboxes.
Then it's just selecting average as the smart-object fusion method and you're done, hardly need an action to do it.

Bonus tip: since smartphones have limited DR, it's generally better to underexpose (you're gonna be using it in low-light conditions anyway, so it will also minimize motion blur or use a lower ISO): you can then push the shadows with some impunity (16 exposures will reduce noise by a factor of 4, 20 a little better than that).

Takes a little bit of RAM to do, though.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2018 at 13:36 UTC as 70th comment | 6 replies

FoVs? Not even the FL for the first camera is listed (one could derive the FoV or the "35mm equivalent FL" since the sensor size for the first camera is present).

As it is, this press release is a little pointless.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2018 at 08:41 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Gibbosa: Monochrome? Only? At $106k....Speechless I am.

Bright-colored confetti in the blown highlights (fountain, bike suspension), and spectacular fail in the cypresses swaying in the wind... three successive moments in time, I know.

Other than that, I like the bike picture.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2018 at 20:29 UTC
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras for parents (266 comments in total)
In reply to:

santamonica812: "Quick. Unpredictable. Unwilling to sit still. Kids really are the ultimate test for a camera's autofocus system. "

When the *first* sentence in an article is both untruthful and ridiculous, it does not make me want to continue reading.

No, kids are NOT the ultimate test for autofocus. Birds in flight maybe. A predator animal chasing prey maybe. A sport where people move quickly and unpredictably maybe. And so on. I have taken literally thousands of photos of kids (yes, including hyperactive ones, who were bouncing off the walls), and shooting them was 50 times easier than capturing sharp images of smaller birds.

(I hope I do not come off sounding ultra-picky. I think that author could have chosen to be more honest, and say something like, "Kids often will be bouncing around, and will likely be the most challenging thing for a novice shooter. A good auto-focus system makes the job easier and you'll get more good shots than when using a camera with inferior auto-focus.")

Yup, definitely more accurate :)

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2018 at 14:30 UTC
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras for parents (266 comments in total)
In reply to:

santamonica812: "Quick. Unpredictable. Unwilling to sit still. Kids really are the ultimate test for a camera's autofocus system. "

When the *first* sentence in an article is both untruthful and ridiculous, it does not make me want to continue reading.

No, kids are NOT the ultimate test for autofocus. Birds in flight maybe. A predator animal chasing prey maybe. A sport where people move quickly and unpredictably maybe. And so on. I have taken literally thousands of photos of kids (yes, including hyperactive ones, who were bouncing off the walls), and shooting them was 50 times easier than capturing sharp images of smaller birds.

(I hope I do not come off sounding ultra-picky. I think that author could have chosen to be more honest, and say something like, "Kids often will be bouncing around, and will likely be the most challenging thing for a novice shooter. A good auto-focus system makes the job easier and you'll get more good shots than when using a camera with inferior auto-focus.")

That's maybe because the average Joe this guide is obviously aimed at will probably never shoot BiFs.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

PDL: Wait - wut?

<snark on>
Buy a pocket camera because you can make phone calls? Who makes phone calls except for spammers?
<snark off>

Source?
But more importantly, do they have a historical record that shows the sharp decline in the last few years, or it's just some average of a month's period or so?

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 13:24 UTC
In reply to:

PDL: Wait - wut?

<snark on>
Buy a pocket camera because you can make phone calls? Who makes phone calls except for spammers?
<snark off>

You're right.

Most of my work-related interactions happen on group chats nowadays, while the critical ones usually happen via mail. Calls not so much.

I'm not necessarily happy with it, but it's just the way it is.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2018 at 13:54 UTC
Total: 1017, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »